Twitter
youtube
Discord
Contact us
Menu
Forums
New posts
Trending
Rules
Explore
Bioenergetic Wiki
Bioenergetic Life Search
Bioprovement Peat Search
Ray Peat Interviews by Danny Roddy
Master List: Ray Peat, PhD Interviews & Quotes by FPS
Traveling Resources
Google Flights
Wiki Voyage
DeepL Translator
Niche
Numbeo
Merch
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search engine:
Threadloom Search
XenForo Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Trending
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Light/Dark Mode
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Information
World News
Ask HN: Is a single source of truth not just a single point of failure?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hacker News" data-source="post: 72725" data-attributes="member: 365"><p>I got AWS certified this week, and as I’ve been learning more about what goes into the design of various systems, it occurs to me that I don’t have an understanding of when a unique part of a system should be considered a pro or con.</p><p>For instance, it makes sense to me that we would want something like the database for an application to be deployed in multiple AZ’s to increase availability via no single point of failure.</p><p>It _also_ makes sense to me that if I’m using redux in a frontend web app, one benefit we get is the single source of truth around app state.</p><p>These two make sense to me independently, but I am struggling to understand how the evaluation around this differs depending on the context. My gut is telling me that I’m trying to compare two different levels of abstraction, but I just can’t quite come up with a rule for when one of these rules applies and the other one does not.</p><p>What questions should I be asking myself to determine which of these is appropriate to apply? Thanks</p><p></p><hr /><p></p><p>Comments URL: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33307421" target="_blank">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33307421</a></p><p></p><p>Points: 10</p><p></p><p># Comments: 7</p><p></p><p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33307421" target="_blank">Continue reading...</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hacker News, post: 72725, member: 365"] I got AWS certified this week, and as I’ve been learning more about what goes into the design of various systems, it occurs to me that I don’t have an understanding of when a unique part of a system should be considered a pro or con. For instance, it makes sense to me that we would want something like the database for an application to be deployed in multiple AZ’s to increase availability via no single point of failure. It _also_ makes sense to me that if I’m using redux in a frontend web app, one benefit we get is the single source of truth around app state. These two make sense to me independently, but I am struggling to understand how the evaluation around this differs depending on the context. My gut is telling me that I’m trying to compare two different levels of abstraction, but I just can’t quite come up with a rule for when one of these rules applies and the other one does not. What questions should I be asking myself to determine which of these is appropriate to apply? Thanks [HR][/HR] Comments URL: [URL]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33307421[/URL] Points: 10 # Comments: 7 [url="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33307421"]Continue reading...[/url] [/QUOTE]
Loading…
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Information
World News
Ask HN: Is a single source of truth not just a single point of failure?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top